Jaded Sage wrote:The point I mean to make is not whether life is meaningless or meaningful, but that there is a feeling that it is meaningful, and that feeling is called "serenity."
life has no apparent meaning.
The point I mean to make is not whether life is meaningless or meaningful, but that there is a feeling that it is meaningful, and that feeling is called "serenity."
Jaded Sage wrote:The point I mean to make is not whether life is meaningless or meaningful, but that there is a feeling that it is meaningful, and that feeling is called "serenity."
life has no apparent meaning.
The point I mean to make is not whether life is meaningless or meaningful, but that there is a feeling that it is meaningful, and that feeling is called "serenity."
if i understand you correctly, you're saying that those who feel that life is meaningful, are in a state of serenity?
alpha wrote:if i understand you correctly, you're saying that those who feel that life is meaningful, are in a state of serenity?
By this definition: I am not saying that all those who feel life is meaningful are serene, but all those who are serene feel life is meaningful.
I have a very important question to ask you. Did you make that mistake on purpose or was it genuine?
actually, it was a literal interpretation of what you said;
Jaded Sage wrote:The point I mean to make is not whether life is meaningless or meaningful, but that there is a feeling that it is meaningful, and that feeling is called "serenity.
"there is a feeling that it is meaningful, and that feeling is called serenity", is same as as saying: "serenity=feeling life is meaningful".
I see how the wording is funny. I think the confusion might arise between these two: believing life has a meaning yet not feeling it, and believing life has a meaning and indeed feeling it. I mean the second one.
Jaded Sage wrote:I see how the wording is funny. I think the confusion might arise between these two: believing life has a meaning yet not feeling it, and believing life has a meaning and indeed feeling it. I mean the second one.
ok, fair enough. i, on the other hand, feel and believe that it has no meaning.
Jaded Sage wrote:I see how the wording is funny. I think the confusion might arise between these two: believing life has a meaning yet not feeling it, and believing life has a meaning and indeed feeling it. I mean the second one.
ok, fair enough. i, on the other hand, feel and believe that it has no meaning.
Totally a valid view. How do we account for the fact that some people, like myself, believe and feel it does?
Have you heard C.S. on the subject? He says that it is as if we have an organ that feels meaning, an organ that is detecting nothing, like eyes in the dark. The simple fact that we feel there is no meaning suggests that there is one, because otherwise we wouldn't have developed the ability to feel its absence in the first place.
I changed nothing. The OP conflated "thought" with "feeling". The distinction does not change the value of what I said in any way.
I quote:
"I have heard that serenity is the feeling that nothing is a waste of time. When people ask about the meaninglessness of life are they really asking about the unhappiness of their own lives? If so, I think it might help to be outright about it."
Articulating a "feeling that nothing is a waste of time" is to make it a thought. The only way we can talk about a serene feeling is to ask if it is a serene truth.
If you don't like that, then say why you think it makes a difference. Don't just say that my words are invalid.
No, the OP didn't conflate 'thought' with 'feeling'. It offered up someone else's opinion as to what 'Serenity' is. I wanted to focus on that, rather than the follow up sentences. That is why I asked JS where this came from.
I read your post, have my thoughts on it, but wanted to give JS an opportunity to reply first.
However, alpha's thumbs-up response caught my attention. The focus now on an apparently 'good point': 'The only serene truth is to realise that every moment is meaningless'. This is a change of OP's initial claim re 'Serenity': 'Serenity is the feeling that nothing is a waste of time'.
Now you are saying that 'the only way we can talk about a serene feeling is to ask if it is a serene truth'.
Again, we are getting further away from the starting point: the definition of the concept of 'Serenity'.
We can ask: 'is it true that serenity is 'X' ?'
As you prefer:
Serenity is to realise that every moment is meaningless. And time is not a quantity that has any value capable of being wasted.
There are more stars in the universe than there are grains of sand on every beach on the earth. Your life means nothing and, each moment means less.
Jaded Sage wrote:Totally a valid view. How do we account for the fact that some people, like myself, believe and feel it does?
Have you heard C.S. on the subject? He says that it is as if we have an organ that feels meaning, an organ that is detecting nothing, like eyes in the dark. The simple fact that we feel there is no meaning suggests that there is one, because otherwise we wouldn't have developed the ability to feel its absence in the first place.
I think it's a clever thought.
my opinion: the simple fact that we feel there is no meaning, suggests that there should be one, not that there necessarily is one.
Not at all. If anything, just that they are denying something, and not nothing.
But we still must come up with an explanation as to how and why we developed the ability to detect its presence and absence. And when those who detect its presence do detect it, what are they detecting?
i actually disagree with both of you (jaded & hobbes) on this issue. i believe that serenity should be wanting meaningfulness, and feeling it, but only when it truly and clearly exists. all other scenarios have nothing to do with serenity.
